Ololade Adeyanju/
Human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), has said that the Peoples Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, will face a tough time challenging President Muhammadu Buhari’s victory in the February 23 election.
Falana said in statement today said that Atiku would encounter “insurmountable legal obstacles” at the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal.
He also cautioned against blackmailing the former Vice-President not to challenge the results of the election.
He recalled that Buhari himself had challenged his losses in court in the successive presidential elections of 2003, 2007 and 2011.
According to him, the failure of the successive governments to reform the electoral process had created insurmountable legal obstacles for election petitioners
His words: “The campaign that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar should not seek redress is totally uncalled for.
“Aggrieved by the general elections of 2003, 2007 and 2011 conducted by INEC, Candidate Muhammadu Buhari sought redress in court.
“The chairman of the APC, Adams Oshiomole and other APC leaders have had cause to claim their mandate through the court.
“Even some APC members who lost the just-concluded National Assembly elections have announced plans to challenge the return of their opponents by INEC.
“Therefore, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar should not be blackmailed or begged by any group of people not to challenge the presidential election held in the country on February 23, 2019.
“Regrettably, however, the failure of the PDP and APC-led Federal Government to reform the electoral process has created insurmountable legal obstacles for election petitioners.”
Falana also noted that judicial authorities had upheld many elections despite the fact that the polls were marred by malfeasance.
He said: “For instance, a petitioner is required to prove that there is substantial non-compliance and that the non-compliance has substantially affected the results of the election.
“In Yussuf v Obasanjo, it was held that an election cannot be questioned on grounds of corrupt practices.
“In Falae v Obasanjo it was held that it has to be proved that financial inducement was authorised by the winner of an election.
“In Buhari v Obasanjo it was held that the onus of proving electoral malpractice rests on the petitioner.
“Several fraudulent elections have been upheld under the doctrine of substantial compliance.
“In several cases, winners of fraudulent elections that were annulled were allowed to take part in rerun elections ordered by the courts.”
0